The rank product method with two samples

FEBS Letters

Volumn 584, Issue 21, 2010, Pages 4481-4484

  Koziol, James A ^a  

^a SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Rank product method; Rank statistic; Two sample comparison

Indexed keywords

GENE PRODUCT; PROTEIN SKCC1; RNA; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION; GENE REPLICATION; HUMAN; MACHINE LEARNING; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MICROARRAY ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROTEOMICS; RANDOM SAMPLE; RANK PRODUCT METHOD; RNA ANALYSIS; RNA INTERFERENCE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTION; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; SYSTEMS THEORY;

GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; LINEAR MODELS; OLIGONUCLEOTIDE ARRAY SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; PROBABILITY; STATISTICS AS TOPIC;

EID: 78049262026     PISSN: 00145793     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.febslet.2010.10.012     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Breitling R., Armengaud P., Amtmann A., Herzyk P. Rank products: a simple, yet powerful, new method to detect differentially regulated genes in replicated microarray experiments. FEBS Lett. 2004, 573:83-92.
2. Breitling R., Herzyk P. Rank-based methods as a non-parametric alternative of the t-test for the analysis of biological microarray data. J. Bioinform. Comput. Biol. 2005, 3:1171-1189.
3. Hong F., Breitling R., McEntree C.W., Wittner B.S., Nemhauser J.L., Chory J. RankProd: a bioconductor package for detecting differentially expressed genes in meta-analysis. Bioinformatics 2006, 22:2825-2827.
4. Jeffrey I.B., Higgins D.G., Culhane A.E. Comparison and evaluation of methods for generating differentially expressed gene lists from microarray data. BMC Bioinformatics 2006, 7:359.
5. Hong F., Breitling R. A comparison of meta-analysis methods for detecting differentially expressed genes in microarray experiments. Bioinformatics 2008, 24:374-382.
6. Birmingham A., Selfors L.M., Forster T., et al. Statistical methods for analysis of high-throughput RNA interference screens. Nat. Methods 2009, 6:569-575.
7. Wiederhold E., Gandhi T., Permentier H.P., et al. The yeast vacuolar membrane proteome. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 2009, 8:380-392.
8. Hoefsloot H.C., Smit S., Smilde A.K. A classification model for the Leiden proteomics competition. Stat. Appl. Genet. Mol. Biol. 2008, 7:8.
9. Koziol J.A. Comments on the rank product method for analyzing replicated experiments. FEBS Lett. 2010, 584:941-944.
10. Gil-Pelaez J. Note on the inversion theorem. Biometrika 1951, 38:481-4822.
11. Imhof J.P. Computing the distribution of quadratic forms in normal variables. Biometrika 1961, 48:419-426.
12. Davies R.B. Numerical inversion of a characteristic function. Biometrika 1973, 60:415-417.
13. 2 random variables. Appl. Stat. 1980, 29:323-333.
14. Cornish E.A., Fisher R.A. Moments and cumulants in the specification of distributions. Rev. Int. Stat. Inst. 1938, 5:307-320.
15. Fisher R.A., Cornish E.A. The percentile points of distributions having known cumulants. Technometrics 1960, 2:209-225.
16. Stuart A., Ord J.K. Kendall's Advanced Theory of Statistics 1987, vol. 1. Oxford University Press, New York. Fifth ed.
17. Lugannani R., Rice S.O. Saddlepoint approximation for the distribution of the sum of independent random variables. Adv. Appl. Probability 1980, 12:475-490.
18. Koziol J.A. A note on Lancaster's procedure for the combination of independent events. Biom. J. 1996, 38:653-660.
19. Koziol J.A., Feng A.C., Jia Z., et al. The wisdom of the commons: ensemble tree classifiers for prostate cancer diagnosis. Bioinformatics 2009, 25:54-60.